Black Crawling Systems Archive Release 1.0/Black Crawling Systems Archive Release 1.0 (L0pht Heavy Industries, Inc.)(1997).ISO/tezcat/Guns/LEAA_Advocate_Article.txt

Text File | 1996-07-08 | 13KB | 250 lines

From the Radio Free Michigan archives

ftp://141.209.3.26/pub/patriot

If you have any other files you'd like to contribute, e-mail them to
[e-mail].
------------------------------------------------


THE LEAA ADVOCATE  Fall/Winter 1994
A publication of the Law Enforcement Alliance of America

Page 23

FORMER ARLINGTON COUNTY POLICE OFFICER SPEAKS OUT

Reveals Intimidation, Threats made by Chief

by Andrew Hays, LEAA Member

As any Pro-Second-Amendment police officer (I.E., working cops) wil tell you,
working for a chief who support politically correct gun control propoganda
makes life at one's department trying at times.  If an officer dares to speak
out about Second Amendment rights, he or she must be prepared to endure often
intense intimidation by the brass to keep quiet - or else.

Having just recently secured new employment, I have the luxury that no active
duty officer has:  I don't have to keep quiet any longer; the threats and
intimidation no longer apply to me.

Up until October 28, 1994, I was a uniform patrol officer with the Arlington
County Police Department in Virginia, just outside of Washington, D.C.

I worked with, and immensely respect, Officer John Donaggio, the officer who
is suing Arlington County Police Chief 'Smokey" Stover and the county itself
for forcing him and nine other officer to "lobby" in favor of the "assault
weapon" gun ban legislation.

My confrontation with Chief Stover over gun control may provide readers with a
little insight, and perhaps some appreciation, as to the tremendous courage
that Officer Donaggio is exhibiting in taking a stand for the right of a
police officer to nobe forced to support a political agenda he or she opposes.

Here's the story from a cop who witnessed it first-hand from the _inside_.

The events began on Sunday, May 1, 1994, four days before the House of
Representatives voted on that misnamed "assault weapon" gun ban (and passed by
a one-vote margin).  At afternoon roll call that Sunday, the on-duty Sergeant
asked for three volunteers from our shift to participate in a photo shoot.  We
were not told what the event was about, only that it was to be held on
Thursday, May 5, and that any officer who would be off-duty that day could
volunteer and collect overtime pay.  The Sergeant said he needed three
officers from each shift plus one more, for a total of 10 officers.

Nobody knew what the event was about, but many of us believed that it was
connected to the upcoming Police Officer's Memorial Week.  I volunteered.

On Tuesday evening, May 3, I received a message on my home answering machine
from my Sergeant, telling me that I should report at 11:00 a.m., Thursday
morning, May 5, for the detail.  I called him back early in the morning on
Wednsday, May 4, to confirm what the event was about, and he said it was in
support of "banning guns that are used to kill cops."

I asked the Sergeant if he meant the "assault weapon" gun ban legislation, and
he said yes.  I then informed the Sergeant that I was familiar with the
legislation and did not know of any reference to firearms that were used to
kill cops as being any part of this bill.  After some "discussion" of the bill
in which the Sergeant clearly did not know what he was talking about, he said
he would take me off the list when I told him there was no way I coudl support
the sham of a bill.

Later that day, May 4, I went to see Deputy Chief Brewer to inform him that
this gun ban was not about crime and that these guns were used in a miniscule
amount of crimes, an almost infintesimal number.  I asked Chief Brewer to
scout the 315-member department to see if any of the weapons that were about
to be banned had been used in any crimes involving our department.  He said,
"I grant you I don't know of any such cases."  However, he did cite that there
was _one_ female officer killed in California involving one of the listed
guns, although he conceded that particular instance entailed an unbalanced
person who killed the officer, and not a gang member, or a drug dealer, or
other "usual" criminal.

I said that, irrespective of the politics involved, it was wrong to send
county police officers, at taxpayer expense, to participate in a political
rally.  I told him that there was no difference between this and punching in
on the County time clock and attending a pro-choice rally, a pro-life rally,
or an NRA rally.  That it was political activism and that it was wrong.

Deputy Chief Brewer replied that there were "benefits" to be gained by the
department for supporting the gun band, and that by sending Arlington County
officers to the Capitol, the department would be in a position to obtain
federal funding to hire more officers.  He specifically mention CBPOP
(Community Based Problem Oriented Policing) officers.  He stressed that
Arlington County's participation in the photo shoot in support of the "assault
weapon" ban could be a way to help secure federal funding.

I then raised the issue with him that none of the officers involved knew what
this event was about.  I asked him if he would mind if I contacted the 10
officers personally, at home, to tell them the details.  He said he didn't
mind, and then provided me with a list of the officers slated for the detail;
he was very courteous and polite.

Later that evening, Wednesday, May 4, I called every one of the 10 officers.
Of all the officers I personally spoke with, not a single one knew the details
of what the photo shoot was about.  Several believed it was the kick-off event
for Police Officers Memorial Week.  When I told them that it was in support of
the "assault weapon" gun ban, more than a few were outraged.  Officer Donaggio
was not at home when I called him, so I left a message on his machine.

As the first officer to find out what the photo shoot was actually about, I
had been able to get out of the detail, and that was the end of my direct
involvement for about a month.

Then on June 10, 1994, a letter was distributed to all county employees by
Arlington County Manager Anton Gardner asking for input on the issues of
employees' political rights and the "Little Hatch Act."  (Section 6 of the
county code which essentially prohibits political activism in uniform or in
any way that identifies a person as a county employee.)

I wrote a letter and delivered it to County Manager Cardner on June 17
detailing to him what had happened on May 5.  I wrote that the officers had
been duped and that I thought it was reprehensible that they were coerced to
participate in a political activity against their will.  I stated that it was
my understanding that the county code already expressly prohibited this type
of activity and that I believed the county code had been violated and that it
was wrong that taxpayer's money had been spent.

Six days later, on June 23rd, a scheduled day off for me, I received a call
from Deputy Chief Brewer asking if I could come in and talk to Chief Stover
regarding my letter I had sent to County Manager Gardner.

Per the request, I went in to talk to the Chief.  Present in the Chief's
office were Chief Stover, Deputy Chief Brewer and myself.  They closed the
door and the Chief put my letter in front of my and asked me if I recognized
it.  I responded that I did and that it was the letter that I had sent to the
County Manager at his request.

Chief Stover then said, "Are you tired of working for here, son?"  He then
started going through my letter part by part, asking me how the county code
had been violated.

He asserted, contrary to my reference of the code section, that categorically
there had not been a violation.  He said that as a police officer, I should
have known how to "read between the lines."  Political activity, he said,
"means supporting a candidate running for office."

Chief Stover then said that "If you ever pull any 'horse-shit' like this
again, and if I hear any more about this, when the smoke clears one of the two
of us won't be here any longer."  He said I could guess which one would be
gone.  He repeatedly asked me, in a threatening manner, if I was tired of
working for the department.

One part of the Chief's tirade in particular is etched in my brain, like it
happened yesterday, when he read aloud one part of my letter to the County
Manager, in whcih I wrote: "...this affair may have been in haste and may have
been a mistake.  If this is the case, I hope you will find an apology to these
officers to be reasonable."

After he read it he circled it with a pen and said, "I will tell you what the
mistake was.  My mistake was asking for volunteers rather than ordering
officers to attend.  Next time I will make it a detail, then I will order them
to go and if they don't I will _fire_ them."  He said that to me twice
directly and repeated it once again to Deputy Chief Brewer.

When Chief Stover threatened to fire me, he never mentioned what he would fire
me for.  Normally, when an officer screws up, they pull out the manual and
show the officer what specific sections have been violated.  He did not do
that with me, because he knew that I hadn't violated any regulation.  He
simply wanted to intimidate me into silence.

This whole episode is a perfect example of how far the gun control extremists
will go to perpetuate the deception that police officers support gun control
legislation...if you count the cops that are coerced.  That's the tactic that
Chief Strover employed.

Based on my personal experience in law enforcement, I have found very little
support among police officers for additional gun control efforts.  Most cops
know that someone who will shoot a 7-11 clerk to death for $40.00 will not pay
much attention to another gun law.  The concept is absolutely laughable.

I believe that there were some crucial votes in favor of the "assault weapon'
ban in the House of Representatives that were swayed by the perception that
law enforcement supported it, in no small measure, by coercing 10 of my fellow
officers to go to the United Stated Capitol Building to lobby in "support" of
the ban.

These officers were used as political puppets -- against their will -- to
stifle their own Constitutional rights.  And if that doesn't sear the soul, I
don't know what does.

That's the crux this whole gun control debate.  It's not about law
enforcement, it's not about police, it's not about crime.  It's about
politics, the politics of control.

-30-

Surprise, Surprise...

At a White House ceremony on October 12, 1994, Arlington Police Chief William
"Smokey" Stover, Attorney General Janet Reno, and other officials announce
that Arlington County, Virginia, had been awarded a $425,475 "Clinton Crime
Bill" federal grant to add six more police officers.  The county matching
grant is $604,475; LEAA tried repeatedly to obtain additional details, but was
unsuccessful.

-30-

LEAA is a non-profit, non-partisan advocacy organization made up of tens of
thousands of law enforcement professionals, crime victims, and concerned
citizens dedicated to making America safer.  LEAA represents and forcefully
advocates it's member's interests by:

- Assisting law enforcement professionals

- Securing victims' rights over criminals' rights

- Winning legislative criminal justice reforms that target violent criminals,
  not law-abiding citizens

- Telling the truth from a law enforcement perspective, why gun control is
  _not_ crime control

For further information, write or call:

Law Enforcement Alliance of America       (703) 847-COPS
7700 Leesburg Pike, Suite 421             [phone] (Fax)
Falls Church, VA  22043                   [phone]

Typographical errors are the fault of the poster, not of the LEAA Advocate.
---
Frank Ney  EMT-A  N4ZHG  LPVa  NRA GOA CCRKBA LEAA JPFO 'M-O-U-S-E'
                        Don't Tread On Me
"People who object to weapons aren't abolishing violence, they're begging for
rule by brute force, where the biggest, strongest animals among men were
always automatically 'right.'  Guns ended that, and social democracy is a
hollow farce without an armed populace to make it work."
                - L. Neil Smith, _The Probability Broach_


------------------------------------------------
(This file was found elsewhere on the Internet and uploaded to the
Radio Free Michigan archives by the archive maintainer.


All files are ZIP archives for fast download.

 E-mail [e-mail])